Legal Opinion

Everett v. Taylor

Utah Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1896No. 744PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from tbe First district court, Territory of TJtaih. Hon. H. W. Smith, Judge. Action by George A. Everett and others against J. C. Taylor and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal.

Read the full summary

Appeal from tbe First district court, Territory of TJtaih. Hon. H. W. Smith, Judge. Action by George A. Everett and others against J. C. Taylor and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. This action was brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants to recover damages in consequence of the alleged wrongful taking and conversion of 7,000 pounds of wool of the value of $700. Defendants filed an answer, in which they alleged the wool belonged to one J. T. Stewart, and that it was seized and converted under an execution against Mm upon a judgment for $642.85 in favor of…

1Opinion of the Court

Zane, G. J.:

The fact that the vendor, Stewart, sacked the wool, and separated it from, the rest, and actually gave the plaintiffs possession of it at its market price, and that they moved it a hundred feet, and piled it up by itself, certainly was evidence of actual delivery. Their possession appears to have been continuous afterwards. There was no evidence that these acts were not in good faith, — that they were merely colorable. It certainly was fox* the jury to determine whether the possession was actual or colorable merely, and whether it was continuous. Section 2837, Comp. Laws Utah…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stevens v. IrwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. Godchaux v. MulfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
  3. Farr v. SwigartUtah Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. White v. PeaseUtah Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Martin Machinery, Inc. v. Strevell-Paterson Finance Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API